Although experts are less willing to openly disclose the fact that adverse reactions can and do include death, one has only to look at reports to the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) to see that mortality is a possible outcome. From 1990 through 2010, for example, VAERS received 1,881 reports of infant deaths following vaccination, representing 4.8% of the adverse events reported for infants over the 20-year period. Moreover, analysts acknowledge that VAERS, as a passive surveillance system, is subject to substantial underreporting. A federal government report from 2010 affirms that VAERS captures only about 1% of vaccine adverse reports.

On the international frontier, the public health community—with the World Health Organization (WHO) in the vanguard—previously used a six-category framework to investigate and categorize serious adverse events following immunization (AEFI), including death. Guided by this tool, public health teams examined temporal criteria and possible alternative explanations to determine whether the relationship of an AEFI to vaccine administration was “very likely/certain,” “probable,” “possible,” “unlikely,” “unrelated,” or “unclassifiable.”

In 2013, the WHO’s Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety discarded the prior tool, ostensibly because users “sometimes [found it] difficult to differentiate between ‘probable,’ ‘possible,’ and ‘unlikely’ categories.” The WHO enlisted vaccine experts to develop a “simpler” algorithm that would be more readily “applicable” to vaccines. The resulting four-category system now invites public health teams to classify an AEFI as either “consistent,” “inconsistent,” or “indeterminate” with a vaccine-related causal association or as “unclassifiable.” Despite the patina of logic suggested by the use of an algorithm, “the final outcome of the case investigation depends on the personal judgment of the assessor” [emphasis added], especially (according to the tool’s proponents) when the process “yields answers that are both consistent and inconsistent with a causal association to immunization.”

In a 2017 letter in the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics, Drs. Jacob Puliyel (an India-based pediatrician and member of India’s National Technical Advisory Group on Immunization) and Anant Phadke (an executive member of the All India Drug Action Network) raise important questions about the revised tool. They describe an Orwellian Catch-22 situation wherein it is nearly impossible to categorize post-vaccine deaths as vaccine-related. This is because the revised algorithm does not allow users to classify an AEFI as “consistent with causal association with vaccine” unless there is evidence showing that the vaccine caused a statistically significant increase in deaths during Phase III clinical trials. By definition, however, any vaccine not found to “retain safety” in Phase III trials cannot proceed to Phase IV (licensure and post-marketing surveillance). The result of the algorithm’s convoluted requirements is that any deaths that occur post-licensure become “coincidental” or “unclassifiable.”

Drs. Puliyel and Phadke describe what happened in India when the country’s National AEFI committee assessed 132 serious AEFI cases reported between 2012 and 2016, including 54 infant deaths that followed administration of a pentavalent all-in-one vaccine intended to protect recipients against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, hepatitis B, and Haemophilus influenzae type b infections. For babies who survived hospitalization, the committee classified three-fifths (47/78) of the AEFI as causally related to vaccines (with 47% of the incidents viewed as “product-related” and 13% as “error-related”), but they rated nearly all (52/54) of the deaths as either coincidental (54%) or unclassifiable (43%) despite mounting evidence that pentavalent and hexavalent vaccines are increasing the risk of sudden unexpected death in infants.

…doctors who “naïvely” accept biased reports on vaccine safety “are losing the trust of the public and in the process…endangering public health.

The absurdity and negligence inherent in the ultimately subjective WHO checklist have not escaped the attention of others in India and beyond. In a series of comments published in the journal Vaccine in response to the 2013 publication of the revised tool, commenters issued the following scathing remarks:

“Even if a healthy child dies within minutes following vaccination and there is no alternate explanation for the AEFI, even then the powers that be could easily declare that death as coincidental and not due to the vaccine, thanks to the new AEFI. This is dangerous ‘science’.”

“Amongst the 20 items of their checklist, no less than 15 (75%) are devoted to refute a vaccine-induced causality [emphasis in original]…. After all and as the authors confess with an astonishing ingenuousness, the main point is to ‘maintain public confidence in immunization programs.’”

“People understand that there are no true coincidences—only events that have been made to appear to be coincidental by either a genuine lack of understand[ing] of the overall facts leading to the ‘coincidence’ reported or by the deliberate suppression of the facts, including when…AEFIs that result in death are made to ‘disappear.’”

“It seems that huge business in [the] vaccine industry is affecting [the] science of vaccines and we are developing various ways to promote the business at the cost of human lives. …Going for a less sensitive tool for safety concerns is not only illogical but risky for the children of the world.”

Unfortunately, many vaccine proponents appear to be more concerned with forestalling “misconceptions” and “erroneous conclusions about cause and effect” than they are about preventing and identifying adverse events following vaccination. The result, as Dr. Puliyel argues, is that doctors who “naïvely” accept biased reports on vaccine safety “are losing the trust of the public and in the process…endangering public health.”

The World Health Organization’s (WHO) cancer agency, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans,” which is the second-highest classification for substances that can cause cancer. Glyphosate is the main ingredient of Monsanto’s best-selling herbicide Roundup.

Instead of protecting public health and removing it from their products, Monsanto hired an army of fraudulent scientists and industry lobbyists to push their agenda. Backed up by the government and mainstream media, fake stories flooded the internet to cast doubts on the cancer-causing properties associated with glyphosate, allowing Monsanto to continue selling their toxic products.

Last July, the European Union (EU) granted an 18-month extension of glyphosate’s approval after a proposal for a full license renewal met opposition from member states and campaign groups. Despite the strong opposition from environmental groups, a new study by the European Chemical Agency (ECHA) has reopened the negotiations with EU nations over renewing the license for glyphosate, Reuters reported.

After Europe forced a delay in the decision to renew the license of glyphosate for commercial use, the European Commission is now proposing to extend its use by 10 years. According to the EU body, which regulates chemicals and biocides, glyphosate should not be classified as a cancer-causing substance.

After taking the latest state of scientific research into account, a spokeswoman for the Commission said that they will start to “work with the Member States to find a solution that enjoys the largest possible support.”

As reported by Reuters, the ECHA study has been welcomed by the EFSA and lobby groups for farmers who use glyphosate-containing products on their fields. No date has been set for the start of the discussions between member states, so there is still hope Europe will maintain its strict safety standards and ban this health damaging chemical from its lawns and fields.

Bart Staes, a Green Party group member of the European Parliament, said that it makes no sense at all to ignore the wide range of risks associated to glyphosate. Despite the clear link between glyphosate and cancer, the decision to seek a 10-year rather than a long-term approval was criticized by glyphosate opponents such as the European Crop Protection group. They called the decision “short-sighted,” claiming it pandered to activists.

Will Europe fall for the bad science practices of the agricultural industry and fake media reports? Or will it make the right decision, putting people before profit? Only time will tell. Since glyphosate was registered in over 130 countries as one of the world’s most heavily used weed killers in 2010, Monsanto will not give up its biggest money-generating product without putting up a big fight. According to analysts, Monsanto is looking at a loss of up to $100 million if Europe bans the use of glyphosate.

News outlets are reporting a new Ebola outbreak in Africa. Here is a quick summary of the basic mainstream story—

The Huffington Post cites a World Health Organization (WHO) statement: four people are believed to have died from Ebola in the Congo.

There are 37 more “suspected cases.”

Discussions are underway about using an “experimental vaccine” in the Congo.

WHO has declared the Ebola outbreak an epidemic.

There is an effort to find 400 people believed to have come into contact with the “suspected cases.” Residents in the affected area of the Congo, the remote Bas-Uele province, are fleeing in fear.

That’s it so far.

I’ve been around the block on the Ebola story a dozen times. Here are the issues the press isn’t reporting—

There is one predictable outcome: at Congo clinics and hospitals, frightened people who arrive with what are labeled “early signs” of Ebola will be labeled as probable cases. What are those symptoms? Fever, chill, sore throat, cough, headache, joint pain. Sound familiar? Normally, this would just be called the flu.

Here’s another point you won’t see discussed on the mainstream news: the reliability of tests used to diagnose Ebola.

Two of those major tests—antibody and PCR—are notoriously unreliable.

Antibody tests will register positive for disease because they ping on factors that have nothing to do with the disease being looked for. And even when the test is accurate, a positive reading merely shows that the patient came in contact with the germ in question. It says nothing about whether he’s ill or is going to become ill.

In fact, before 1985, when the science was turned on its head, antibody-positive status was taken to mean the patient’s immune system had successfully warded off the germ.

The PCR test is a sophisticated way of amplifying tiny, tiny bits of what are assumed to be viral material, so they can be observed. The problem here is this: if only tiny bits of material could be found in the patient’s body in the first place, there is no reason to suppose they’re enough to cause disease. Very, very large amounts of virus are necessary to begin to suspect the patient is ill or is going to become ill.

Bottom line: huge numbers of people on whom these tests are done are going to be falsely diagnosed with Ebola.

Here is what I wrote about the Ebola outbreak of 2014 in Africa. It applies today:

Ebola, covert op in a hypnotized world, August 2, 2014:

You show people a germ and you tell them what it is and what it does, and people salute. They give in. They believe. They actually know nothing. But they believe.

The massive campaign to make people believe the Ebola virus can attack at any moment, after the slightest contact, is quite a success.

People are falling all over themselves to raise the level of hysteria.

This is what is preventing a hard look at Liberia, Sierra Leone, and the Republic Guinea, three African nations where poverty and illness are staples of everyday life for the overwhelming number of people.

The command structure in those areas has a single dictum: don’t solve the human problem.

Don’t clean up the contaminated water supplies, don’t return stolen land to the people so they can grow food and finally achieve nutritional health, don’t solve overcrowding, don’t install basic sanitation, don’t strengthen their immune systems so they can ward off germs, don’t let the people have power—because then they would throw off the local and global corporate juggernauts that are sucking the land of all its resources.

In order not to solve the problems of the people, a cover story is necessary. A cover story that exonerates the power structure.

A cover story like a germ.

It’s all about the germ. The demon. The strange attacker.

Forget everything else. The germ is the single enemy.

Forget the fact, for example, that a recent study of 15 pharmacies and 5 hospital drug dispensaries in Sierra Leone discovered the widespread and unconscionable use of beta-lactam antibiotics.

These drugs are highly toxic. One of their effects? Excessive bleeding.

Which just happens to be the scary “Ebola effect” that’s being trumpeted in the world press.

(J Clin Microbiol, July 2013, 51(7), 2435-2438), and Annals of Internal Medicine Dec. 1986, “Potential for bleeding with the new beta-lactam antibiotics”)

Forget the fact that pesticide companies are notorious for shipping banned toxic pesticides to Africa. One effect of the chemicals? Bleeding.

Forget that. It’s all about the germ and nothing but the germ.

Forget the fact that, for decades, one of the leading causes of death in the Third World has been uncontrolled diarrhea. Electrolytes are drained from the body, and the adult or the baby dies. (Diarrhea is also listed as an “Ebola” symptom.)

Any sane doctor would make it his first order of business to replace electrolytes with simple supplementation—but no, the standard medical line goes this way:

The diarrhea is caused by germs in the intestinal tract, so we must pile on massive amounts of antibiotics to kill the germs.

The drugs kill off all bacteria in the gut, including the necessary and beneficial ones, and the patient can’t absorb what little food he has access to, and he dies.

Along the way, he can also bleed.

But no, all the bleeding comes from Ebola. It’s the germ. Don’t think about anything else.

Forget the fact that adenovirus vaccines, which have been used in Liberia, Guinea, and Liberia (the epicenter of Ebola), have, according to vaccines.gov, the following adverse effects: blood in the urine or stool, and diarrhea.

No, all the bleeding comes from the Ebola germ. Of course. Don’t think about anything else.

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

The release of this information as the Trump Administration is considering the appointment of Robert F. Kennedy JR to head a panel to investigate them and the pharmaceutical companies behind them is timely, and perhaps, even deliberate. But the real news here is what is in these vaccines. Note the following paragraphs:

Using extremely sensitive new technologies not used in vaccine manufacturing, Italian scientists reported they were “baffled” by their discoveries which included single particles and aggregates of organic debris including red cells of human or possibly animal origin and metals including lead, tungsten, gold, and chromium, that have been linked to autoimmune disease and leukemia.

In the study, published this week in the International Journal of Vaccines and Vaccination, the researchers led by Antonietta Gatti, of the National Council of Research of Italy and the Scientific Director of Nanodiagnostics, say their results “show the presence of micro- and nano-sized particulate matter composed of inorganic elements in vaccine samples” not declared in the products’ ingredients lists.

…

Lead particles were found in the cervical cancer vaccines, Gardasil and Cervarix, for example, and in the seasonal flu vaccine Aggripal manufactured by Novartis as well as in the Meningetec vaccine meant to protect against meningitis C.

Other metal contaminants included platinum, silver, bismuth, iron, and chromium. Chromium (alone or in alloy with iron and nickel) was identified in 25 of the human vaccines from Italy and France that were tested.

…

Observe that this study was conducted by the Italian National Council of Research, and hence, is not so easily dismissed by the Center for Disease Control or by corporate shills. And also observe the list of what was found: unidentifiable red blood cells, lead, tungsten, gold, chromium, stainless steel, zinc, platinum, silver, bismuth, iron, and nickel. All we’re missing is a little thorium toothpaste (that’s a joke for those who’ve been following my interviews over the years), and a dash of uranium. But seriously, the list is far from complete. There is a growing body of criticism that has maintained that vaccines also contain human stem cells (from aborted babies), and so on. And let’s not leave out aluminum:

The investigation revealed aluminum and sodium chloride, the usual component of saline, as was expected, because they are named ingredients of most vaccines. …

Aluminum has a documented neurotoxicity all by itself. The French veterinary vaccines exclude it for this reason. The human ones don’t. (Emphasis added)

Ponder that: in France, veterinary vaccines are prohibited from containing aluminum, but human ones aren’t… a disturbing factoid, since there are also studies linking aluminum to Alzheimer’s(that’s that “documented neurotoxicity” part, perhaps).

So what’s the problem? In mentioning the presence of aluminum, the Italian researchers go on to mention a very significant point, one which we have observed here in prior blogs about vaccines and, incidentally, about GMOs:

Aluminum has a documented neurotoxicity all by itself. The French veterinary vaccines exclude it for this reason. The human ones don’t. The researchers express concern about synergy of multiple toxins added to this known neurotoxin. “It is a well-known fact in toxicology that contaminants exert a mutual, synergic effect, and as the number of contaminants increases, the effects grow less and less predictable. The more so when some substances are unknown.” (Emphases added)

It’s that “mutual, synergistic effect” that should make everyone sit up and take notice, for what this really means is that while the effects of individual contaminants are fairly well known, their effects when working in combination multiply synergistically, and by dint of that, have effects that are geometrically multiplied and that are not well understood.

What’s the bottom line? Well, for one thing, I suspect it won’t be long before “Big Pharma” – and let’s call them what they really are: I.G. Farbensanto – will realize they’re missing a golden opportunity to harvest even more wealth from people, and start contaminating animal vaccines as well, and reaping enormous profit from suffering animals and their owners, and then proffer even more drugs as “cures”, for a hefty price, of course. And as for humans, I don’t know about you, but I strongly suspect the omission of these contaminants from their vaccine labels is not accidental.

About Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

A toddler who developed severe neurological symptoms including blindness associated with chronic encephalitis and died following MMR vaccination was found to have vaccine-derived mumps virus in his brain,a new study reports.

Published in the current issue of the journal, Acta Neuropathologica, the study is the first of its kind to conclusively demonstrate chronic brain damage in the form of “panencephalitis” due to a vaccine-derived strain of the mumps virus. In light of a recent epidemic of mumps in highly vaccinated populations, the research raises questions about the dangers of live vaccine virus mutations and about public health claims that the MMR is a completely safe and effective vaccine without serious side effects.

MMR, BRAIN INFECTION AND DEATH

The study describes an 18-month old infant who was diagnosed with Severe Combined Immunodeficiency Disease (SCID) — a serious immune system defect that may follow infection — four months after he received the triple Measles Mumps Rubella vaccine that contains live viruses.

The baby was treated for the illness but six months later became ill again with fever, rash, diarrhoea, lethargy and seizures. MRI scans of his brain showed evidence of encephalitis — brain inflammation due to infection.

The toddler was treated with antimicrobials, antivirals and steroids and sent home on anticonvulsant drugs. Over the next few months, behavioural problems became obvious, his hearing was impaired and his speech and language were delayed. A year later, by then four years old, he was still suffering from seizures and he became increasingly lethargic, disoriented and agitated. His walking was increasingly uncoordinated and he began to lose his eyesight.

A repeat MRI scan of the boy’s brain revealed abnormalities and a brain biopsy was taken at Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children in London. It revealed neuronal death and evidence of central nervous system damage and chronic inflammation. Despite aggressive treatment, his seizures increased, he became weak on his left side, went blind and the five-year-old died seven weeks later.

VACCINE VIRUS CONFIRMED

Spinal fluid and urine samples collected during the boy’s last hospitalisation, as well as RNA re-extracted from his brain biopsy, were sent to the Public Health England Virus Reference Laboratory for sequencing.

Researchers, led by Sofia Morfopoulou of the Division of Infection and Immunity, University College London, and at the National Institute for Biological Standards and Control, used deep sequencing technology to identify the MuV –JL5 vaccine virus strain in the boy’s brain biopsy which was negative for all other viruses.

Genetic Drift and Outbreaks

Mutations in the mumps vaccine virus from that in the batch of the vaccine the boy had received were also detected. The study refers to a 2015 study confirming “genetic instability” of mumps vaccine virus that leads to “genetic drift” between different vaccine batches and may explain why some mumps vaccines induce more serious adverse reactions than others, especially when they are grown on different media.

This science may also explain why the mumps vaccine is failing. A recent outbreak among more than 1,600 mostly vaccinated people in Arkansas has public health officers there admitting that the vaccine isn’t protecting against emerging new strains of the virus.

It’s part of a growing phenomenon that scientists are reporting in many vaccines called “sero-conversion” – when vaccines diminish the strain of a virus they are targeting, but another strain of the same virus blooms — just as antibiotics wipe out bacterial infections but leave antibiotic-resistant superbugs to thrive.

One study in chickens found that vaccination against one disease virus “enhances the fitness of more virulent strains”, making it possible for superbug strains to develop and be transmitted to other chickens, creating “conditions that promote the emergence of pathogen strains that cause more severe disease in unvaccinated hosts”.

A 2015 study of humans in the journal Microbiome, found that the nasal flu vaccine did the same thing. The researchers concluded that the vaccine activates the immune system in a way “may foster the disproportionate emergence of potentially pathogenic species such as S. aureus”– a bug associated with ear infections and serious neuropsychiatric disorders like PANDAS.

Sero-replacement is a recognized snag for numerous vaccines. A 2017 study tries to quantify the problem with a pneumococcal vaccine. It’s a documented difficulty with a rotavirus vaccine. And it’s a long-documented problem with the polio vaccine. This 2016 study , for example, acknowledges that live attenuated oral poliomyelitis vaccine strains are “genetically unstable”, and their circulation (unavoidable when people defecate the vaccine virus which can hang around for decades), “can lead to the emergence of pathogenic circulating vaccine-derived polioviruses”. It turns out, the vaccine virus mutates and recombines with other circulating strains and produces something even more “neurovirulent”.

That is why the World Health Organisation is losing its battle with polio in India. More children are paralyzed and die there now than would ever be harmed by wild polio because they are afflicted with a new “acute flaccid paralysis” — a polio they won’t call polio because it’s made in their laboratories. It’s also strikingly similar to the polio-like “mystery illness” paralysing children in America.

JUST LIKE MEASLES ENCEPHALITIS

The British researchers in the current study compare this mumps encephalitis case to documented measles encephalitis and suggest a “common pathogenic process” is at work. They cite a 2015 study in the journal Science and Translational Medicine that describes a 13-month-old baby who died from encephalitis after the MMR where vaccine virus was found in his brain and throughout his body. These results make a “strong case for deep sequencing of brain tissue where other methods have failed” to identify a pathogen, the study said.

In their conclusion, the researchers give heed to the “highly effective and safe vaccine” mantra required to keep publishing. As usual, there is no hint of apology for physician-induced death. No consideration of how often this same pathology might play a role in SIDS or autism, of course, although public health has been scratching their heads about those for a very long time. But they do say “this case highlights the importance of developing strategies such as newborn screening to exclude the very small proportion of infants at extremely high risk of complications from live-attenuated vaccines.”

That presumes there is a way to screen children at risk of live virus vaccines which include the MMR, the chickenpox and flu vaccines. There is no evidence that the little boy in the study was ill before he got his MMR. Yet they have begun the quest for his deficiency or genetic weakness. And they may find some because we all have them. But they are ignoring the research they just cited, that there is problem inherent in the vaccine manufacturing process and with genetic drift of the viruses. It’s more evidence that the old medical paradigm, which sees something wrong with the person who cannot tolerate the drug rather than with the drug itself, is getting older by the minute.

The answer from public health, of course, is always the same: time for another vaccine. Another dose, another strain, another booster for this group or that. And an endless, circuitous virus chase. But in public health, the question if there might be a better way to fight disease in unthinkable. They would never seek to understand why most kids get through measles without a hitch and are left with lifelong protection against the disease and more protection too against diseases like cancer, or to find out what is lacking in the immune systems of the few children who don’t. But can we really continue this aim of vaccinating everyone against everything? What if it came down to something as simple as making sure kids got vitamins instead of vaccines? Too dangerous? At least vitamins couldn’t mutate and infect their brains.

BRING ON RFK JR., PLEASE

Even if screening high-risk newborns from vaccines were possible, (and it’s a great idea), there’s no chance of it happening in the current public health paradigm. Because for public health to start screening newborns for susceptibility to vaccine dangers, they would first have to admit what this science shows clearly, that vaccines have dangers. That they can and do cause serious brain damage and even death. And if they admit that, then they have to concede the possibility that vaccines may have a role in other neurodevelopmental disorders that are epidemic in children today.

How likely is that to happen at the Centers for Disease Control where people like Colleen Boyle and Frank DeStefano still oversee immunisation safety? People who, everyone knows, including their colleague who blew the whistle on them, knowingly manipulated, buried and shredded evidence to hide a link between the MMR and autism. People who would deceive the American public, and people across the globe, to protect their vaccines rather than the children who get them. And who would watch as millions of children suffer as a result, and do nothing?

What this science shows more than anything else, is how desperately we need President-elect Trump to move forward in 2017 with his commission on vaccine safety and scientific integrity.

The basic purpose of these ten forms is the presentation of a false picture of reality.

You could find more forms, or divide these ten into sub-categories.

The ten basic forms are:

* Direct lying about matters of fact.

* Leaving out vital information.

* Limited hangout. (This is an admission of a crime or a mistake, which only partially reveals the whole truth. The idea is that by admitting a fraction of what really happened and burying the biggest revelations, people will be satisfied and go away, and the story will never be covered again.)

* Shutting down the truth after publishing it—includes failing to follow up and investigate a story more deeply.

* Not connecting dots between important pieces of data.

* Censoring the truth, wherever it is found (or calling it “fake news”).

* Using biased “experts” to present slanted or false “facts.”

* Repeating a false story many times—this includes the echo-chamber effect, in which a number of outlets “bounce” the false story among themselves.

* Claiming a reasonable and true consensus exists, when it doesn’t, when there are many important dissenters, who are shut out from offering their analysis.

* Employing a panoply of effects (reputation of the media outlet, voice quality of the anchor, acting skills, dry mechanical language, studio lighting, overlay of electronic transmissions, etc.) to create an impression of elevated authority which is beyond challenge.

These are all traditional forms and methods.

Here’s an example of a big story that deployed all ten forms of fake news: the Swine Flu pandemic of 2009.

In the spring of 2009, the World Health Organization (elevated authority beyond challenge) announced that Swine Flu was a level-6 pandemic—its highest category of “danger.” In fact, there were only 20 confirmed cases at the time (direct lying about “danger”). And W.H.O. quietly changed the definition of “level-6” so widespread death and damage were no longer required (another aspect of direct lying).

The story was, of course, picked up by major media outlets all over the world (echo chamber effect, fake consensus, never connected dots re W.H.O. lies), and quite soon, Swine Flu case numbers rose into the thousands (direct lying, as we’ll soon see).

Medical experts were brought in to bolster the claims of danger (biased experts; important dissenters never given space to comment).

In the early fall of 2009, Sharyl Attkisson, then a star investigative reporter for CBS News, published a story on the CBS News website. She indicated that the CDC had secretly stopped counting the number of Swine Flu cases in America. No other major news outlet reported this fact (omitting vital information).

Attkisson discovered the reason the CDC had stopped counting: the overwhelming number of blood samples taken from the most likely Swine Flu patients were coming back from labs with: no trace of Swine Flu or any other kind of flu. Therefore, a gigantic hoax was revealed. The pandemic was a dud, a fake.

Despite Attkisson’s efforts, CBS never followed up on her story (shutting down the truth after exposing it). Never probed the lying by the CDC (failure to connect dots). In a sense, CBS turned Attkisson’s story into a limited hangout—a further investigation would have uncovered acres of criminal behavior by both the CDC and the World Health Organization, to say nothing of the governments and media outlets that supported these lying agencies. The mainstream press essentially censored Attkisson’s revelations.

Then, about three weeks after CBS published Attkisson’s story, WebMD published a piece in which the CDC claimed that its own (lying) estimate of 10,000 or so cases of Swine Flu in the US was a gross understatement. Truly, there were 22 MILLION cases of Swine Flu in the US (doubling-down on lying).

And that was that.

Which leads to an 11th form of fake news: if one lie doesn’t quite fly, tell a much bigger lie.

And these mainstream sources are currently shouting and bloviating about independent media spreading fake news. I guess you could call that number 12: accusing their opponents of committing the crimes they are, in fact, committing.

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

The year 2016 has been pivotal one for mankind. The foreign and economic policies of the USA are in shambles as the Obama era ends. A new President, one with no political experience, takes office in some days having promised to “make America great again.” He has promised to “drain the swamp” of special interest corporate influence in Washington yet has chosen his cabinet from the banks of those special Wall Street interests, has chosen his national security and Pentagon figures from US military generals, and has chosen no fewer than five cabinet members who are billionaires, and seeks counsel of geopolitical architects of war such as Henry Kissinger

The European Union is nearing a dissolution of the Brussels construct that is so anti-democratic. Not only Brexit, but now also likely in coming months Italy, Hungary, Greece, even France are possible candidates to leave the dysfunctional European Union. The Euro project has created deeply divided EU. The refugee crisis that has been created by Brussels, and by the German government, is causing social unrest and conflict unprecedented in peacetime.

To the east of the EU, despite continuing economic sanctions, Russia has decisively turned to the east and cooperation with China has deepened on all levels, a geopolitical nightmare for Washington. China for its part is engaged in the largest infrastructure construction in history, its One Bridge, One Road, new high-speed rail and deep-water port shipping infrastructure linking for the first time undeveloped resources and potential markets across Eurasia. The Washington policy of war by proxy to destroy Syria’s regime has decisively failed. Russia is emerging as a major power after a quarter century of abject humiliation by the Western NATO powers after 1991.

And Russia has taken decisions that will benefit all mankind by its law banning all planting of Genetically Modified seeds or GMO. Russia is, as a result, emerging as one of the most healthy natural food producers on the planet, in direct opposition to the USA which has allowed GMO to completely takeover American food.

It’s becoming increasingly clear to more people that the agenda of GMO, of Monsanto, which soon will vanish into the bowels of Bayer AG of Germany, is one of harm, not of feeding the hungry world. Its special agrichemicals like Roundup are labelled “probable carcinogens” by the WHO, yet governments ignore independent tests showing the harm. While Russia has just taken a courageous decision to ban all GMOs, China’s government looks set, despite the domestic opposition, to promote GMO as “biotechnology,” a huge error.

As we begin a new year we find our world beset with problems, with hate, murder, power addiction, and at the same time we find more pockets of hope, of life, of optimism that our world is weary of the endless wars and genuinely wanting peace. May peace, not war, be the hallmark of the coming year!

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”